ESA Monthly PMOC Report - March 2016 · 2020. 9. 30. · Report Period March 1 to March 31, 2016...

March 2016 Monthly Report MTACC-ESA

PMOC COMPREHENSIVE MONTHLY REPORT

East Side Access (MTACC-ESA) Project Metropolitan Transportation Authority

New York, New York

Report Period March 1 to March 31, 2016

PMOC Contract No. DTFT6014D00017 Task Order No. 2, Project No. DC-27-5287, Work Order No.2 Urban Engineers of New York, D.P.C., 2 Penn Plaza, Suite 1103, New York, New York 10121 PMOC Lead: E. Williamson, 212-736-9100; [email protected] Length of time on project: Eight years on project for Urban Engineers

March 2016 Monthly Report ii MTACC-ESA

TABLE OF CONTENTS EAST SIDE ACCESS PROJECT (ESA) THIRD PARTY DISCLAIMER ......................................................................................................1 REPORT FORMAT AND FOCUS .................................................................................................1 MONITORING REPORT ...............................................................................................................1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..............................................................................................................1 ELPEP COMPLIANCE SUMMARY.............................................................................................8 1.0 GRANTEE’S CAPABILITIES AND APPROACH ........................................................11

1.1 TECHNICAL CAPACITY AND CAPABILITY ............................................................................11 1.2 PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN ............................................................................................12 1.3 PROJECT CONTROLS ............................................................................................................12 1.4 FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS ...................................................................................................13 1.5 SAFETY AND SECURITY .......................................................................................................14 1.6 PROJECT QUALITY ..............................................................................................................14 1.7 STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................15 1.8 LOCAL FUNDING .................................................................................................................15 1.9 PROJECT RISK MONITORING AND MITIGATION ...................................................................16

2.0 PROJECT SCOPE..............................................................................................................16 2.1 ENGINEERING/DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES ...........................................17 2.2 PROCUREMENT ...................................................................................................................18 2.3 CONSTRUCTION...................................................................................................................19 2.4 OPERATIONAL READINESS ..................................................................................................40 2.5 VEHICLES ............................................................................................................................40 2.6 PROPERTY ACQUISITION AND REAL ESTATE .......................................................................40 2.7 COMMUNITY RELATIONS ....................................................................................................40

3.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SUB PLANS ................................................42 3.1 PMP SUB-PLANS ................................................................................................................42 3.2 PROJECT PROCEDURES ........................................................................................................43

4.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE .....................................................................................................44 4.1 INTEGRATED PROJECT SCHEDULE .......................................................................................44 4.2 180-DAY LOOK-AHEAD OF IMPORTANT ACTIVITIES ..........................................................48 4.3 CRITICAL PATH ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................49 4.4 PROJECT SCHEDULE CONTINGENCY ANALYSIS ...................................................................52

5.0 PROJECT COST ................................................................................................................53 5.1 BUDGET/COST ....................................................................................................................53

March 2016 Monthly Report iii MTACC-ESA

5.2 PROJECT COST MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL ....................................................................54 5.3 CHANGE ORDERS .................................................................................................................55 5.4 PROJECT FUNDING ..............................................................................................................57 5.5 COST VARIANCE ANALYSIS ................................................................................................57 5.6 PROJECT COST CONTINGENCY ............................................................................................57

6.0 RISK MANAGEMENT......................................................................................................58 6.1 RISK PROCESS .....................................................................................................................59 6.2 RISK REGISTER ...................................................................................................................60 6.3 RISK MITIGATIONS .............................................................................................................60

7.0 PMOC CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .....................................................62 8.0 GRANTEE ACTIONS FROM QUARTERLY AND MONTHLY MEETINGS .........64 TABLES

TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF CRITICAL DATES ..........................................................................7 TABLE 2: PROJECT BUDGET/COST TABLE ..........................................................................8 TABLE 4.1: ESA JULY 2014 BASELINE ...................................................................................48 TABLE 4.2: PMOC BASELINE ...................................................................................................48 TABLE 4.3: 1Q AND 2Q2016 UPCOMING CONTRACTS ......................................................49 TABLE 4.4: IPS #78, DATA DATE FEBRUARY 1, 2016, CRITICAL PATH ........................49 TABLE 4.5: CS179 CONTRACTOR MILESTONE DATES ....................................................51 TABLE 5.1: COMPARISON OF STANDARD COST CATEGORIES: FFGA VS. CBB ......53 TABLE 5.2: PROJECT BUDGET AND INVOICES AS OF FEBRUARY 1, 2016 .................54 TABLE 5.3: ESA’S CHANGE ORDER LOG IN JANUARY 2016 (>$100,000) ......................55 TABLE 5.4: SUMMARY OF ESA COST CONTINGENCY .....................................................57 APPENDICES APPENDIX A – LIST OF ACRONYMS APPENDIX B – PROJECT OVERVIEW AND MAP APPENDIX C – LESSONS LEARNED APPENDIX D – SAFETY AND SECURITY CHECKLIST APPENDIX E – ON-SITE PICTURES APPENDIX F – COST AND SCHEDULE ANALYSIS TABLES APPENDIX G – POTENTIAL “BUY AMERICA” STATUS SUMMARY APPENDIX H– ESA CORE ACCOUNTABILITY ITEMS

March 2016 Monthly Report 1 MTACC-ESA

THIRD PARTY DISCLAIMER This report and all subsidiary reports are prepared solely for the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). This report should not be relied upon by any party, except FTA or the project sponsor, in accordance with the purposes as described below: For projects funded through FTA Full Funding Grant Agreements (FFGAs) program, FTA and its Project Management Oversight Contractor (PMOC) use a risk-based assessment process to review and validate a project sponsor’s budget and schedule. This risk-based assessment process is a tool for analyzing project development and management. Moreover, the assessment process is iterative in nature; any results of an FTA or PMOC risk-based assessment represent a “snapshot in time” for a particular project under the conditions known at that same point in time. The status of any assessment may be altered at any time by new information, changes in circumstances, or further developments in the project, including any specific measures a sponsor may take to mitigate the risks to project costs, budget, and schedule, or the strategy a sponsor may develop for project execution. Therefore, the information in the monthly reports will change from month to month, based on relevant factors for the month and/or previous months.

REPORT FORMAT AND FOCUS This report is submitted in compliance with the terms of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Contract No. DTFT6014D00017, Task Order No. 002. Its purpose is to provide information and data to assist the FTA as it continually monitors the Grantee’s technical capability and capacity to execute a project efficiently and effectively, and hence, whether the Grantee continues to be ready to receive federal funds for further project development. This report covers the project and quality management activities on the East Side Access (ESA) Mega-Project managed by MTA Capital Construction (MTACC) with MTA as the Grantee and financed by the FTA FFGA. All Grantee cost and schedule data included in this report is based on the status date of February 1, 2016.

MONITORING REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The East River tunnels in Manhattan are at capacity. The ESA project is anticipated to improve LIRR tunnel capacity constraints and enable the growth of the overall system. The project comprises a 3.5 mile commuter rail extension of the Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) service from Sunnyside, Queens, to Grand Central Terminal (GCT), Manhattan, utilizing the existing 63rd St. Tunnel under the East River and new tunnels in Manhattan and Queens, including new power and ventilation facilities. The project includes a new eight track terminal constructed below the existing GCT and a new surface rail yard in Queens for daytime train storage. Ridership forecast is 162,000 daily riders (27,300 new riders) in 2020. The project will provide increased capacity for the commuter rail lines of the LIRR and direct access between suburban Long Island and Queens and a new passenger terminal in Grand Central Terminal (GCT) in east Midtown Manhattan, in addition to the LIRR’s current Manhattan connection at Penn Station.


2. CHANGES DURING 1st Quarter 2016 a. Engineering/Design Progress As of February 1, 2016, MTACC reported that the overall Engineering effort is 99.0% complete, based on Earned Value for Design Deliverables. Its Cost Report shows 92.0% of the overall EIS & Engineering category as invoiced and 92.0% of the budgeted section titled “Design” as having been invoiced. b. New Contract Procurements Seven technical/schedule proposals for Contract CM007, GCT Station Caverns and Track, were submitted on September 15, 2015. Seven cost proposals were submitted on October 27, 2015. During November 2015, five proposers of the seven were qualified for continued negotiation. Revised costs and schedules from the three remaining qualified proposers, representing the first round of the Best and Final Offers, were submitted on December 30, 2015. Final presentations by the proposers for the CM007 contract were completed in January 2016. MTACC was able to complete the initial negotiations with the apparent low bidder and the contract was approved by the MTA Board on January 27, 2016. Award is pending completion of negotiations on the Best and Final Offer (BAFO) schedule and acceptance of the final contract price and schedule. Delay to ESA program critical path is now expected to be over three months. Contract VQ033, Mid-Day Storage Yard CILs, was advertised on August 14, 2015, and bids were received on October 30, 2015. The contract was awarded on January 15, 2016, with a Notice to Proceed date of January 19, 2016. c. Construction Progress The Project Management Team (PMT) reported in its January 2016 Monthly Progress Report that total construction progress reached 60.9% complete; the Cost Report also shows 61.9% of construction as having been invoiced. d. Continuing and Unresolved Issues The PMOC is becoming increasingly concerned about both the delay in the award and Notice to Proceed for Contract CM007, GCT Station Caverns and Track, and the outcome of the protracted negotiations with the apparent low bidder that is now entering its fourth month. This delay has already adversely impacted the ESA program critical path by at least 3 months. Final agreements reached through the negotiations may not support the contract price and period of performance approved by the MTA Board in January 2016. The current potential shortfall in funding availability continues to be a major issue that could have a significant impact on the program schedule, particularly with regard to the award of Contract CM007 (GCT Station Caverns and Track), which is on the program critical path; exercising options on Contract CS179 (Systems Package 1) and other contracts; and continued funding of force account construction and support work. Although MTACC has been working closely with MTA to arrange for adequate funding to meet schedule requirements for award of contracts, this effort relies on arrangements, both internal and external to the ESA project, involving multiple, temporary funding shifts and transfers. This approach is not sustainable in


the longer timeframe and is subject to change as new and unexpected financial challenges arise. This issue is discussed further in Section 6.0, Risk Management, of this report. The PMOC is concerned that the MTACC burn rate of Unallocated Contingency continues to trend poorly and, as a result, there may not be sufficient contingency funding available to award all of the remaining construction contracts. This issue is discussed further in Section 5.0, Project Cost, of this report. With regard to the “ESA First” Harold Re-sequencing Plan developed in December 2014 and implemented in 2015, the PMOC notes that Amtrak has not been able to provide even the reduced level of force account resources that had been planned in support of the ESA schedule. Additionally, the projected force account costs are trending noticeably higher than planned and the force account contingency budget line item is nearly depleted. ESA continues to work on a comprehensive study to identify and evaluate the reasons for this continuing problem and to make recommendations with regard to a revised basis for planning and scheduling the remaining work in the Harold Interlocking and a revised cost forecast. The study had been expected to be completed in January 2016 but remains incomplete as of March 31, 2016. The PMOC has continuing concerns regarding the impact to the ESA Harold work due to the Amtrak program to harden ERT Lines 3 and 4 in preparation for extended outages for ERT Lines 1 and 2 to complete Hurricane Sandy damage related reconstruction work, earlier scheduled to commence in 2018, but now planned for 2019. Amtrak has not provided any specific details about the ERT Lines 3 and 4 hardening work, but there is concern that significant Amtrak force account resources will be needed to support the hardening work that could further reduce the Amtrak resources available to support the ESA Harold Re-Sequencing Plan that is currently under review. There is also concern that track outages required for the hardening work may conflict with ESA needs to support the planned Harold work. Delays in completing the Harold Re-Sequencing Plan may result in essential ESA work being pushed back into the timeframe for Amtrak’s extended outages for ERT Lines 1 and 2. The PMOC notes, however, that in early November 2015, ESA advised that Amtrak is leaning toward closing ERT Line 2 first in 2019. Although this represents a delay from the earlier 2018 forecast time frame, the selection of Line 2 to close first does support the current ESA Harold schedule. No additional details, updates or commitments regarding these issues were available as of March 31, 2016. e. New Cost and Schedule Issues ESA indicates that Allocated Contingency has been reduced this period by $32.2 million, from $294.2 million at the end of the 4Q2015 to $262 million at February 1, 2016. Unallocated Contingency (or Project wide Reserve as it is also referred to) remained the same for the period at $385.9 million. The current forecast for Project wide Reserve at project completion is $275.2 million. The PMOC is concerned that the Reserve will be insufficient due to the current burn rate, since it is expected that the results of the ongoing Harold Schedule Status update and the ongoing Force Account Forecast Update will reveal further schedule delays and resultant cost increases. ESA indicates that the cost forecast includes updated cost estimates related to CM007. The current unawarded status of the contract, however, places these numbers in question. In addition, potential funding delay impacts are not reflected in the forecast. The forecast must, therefore, be considered as optimistic.

ESA reported the IPS was changed from an Early Revenue Service Date (RSD) of March 25, 2020 to August 19, 2020. In IPS #78, ESA reported that Program Schedules changes were affected by the issuance of Addendum #30 for CM007 Caverns Fit-Out contract procurement


which extended Milestone #7 of the Integrated Systems Testing by almost five months (from March 25, 2020 to August 19, 2020). The PMT was not able to issue the NTP for CM007 in mid-March as previously planned. This award is presently forcast for early to mid-April 2016. The PMOC notes, however, that this delay will further reduce the schedule contingency of the Program.

3. PROJECT STATUS SUMMARY AND PMOC ASSESSMENT a. Grantee Technical Capacity and Capability Since 4Q2015, the PMOC had been reporting on its concern regarding inadequate support of the program level risk management process due to the lack of continuity of supervision created by turnovers and vacancy of the ESA Risk Manager position in 2015. This concern is now resolved based on the PMOC’s observation that the new ESA Risk Manager, who started on the project in January 2016, has demonstrated his ability to accomplish full restoration of the risk management process. MTACC made a change in the ESA project organization related to how the package level construction management process is managed at the executive level. A more detailed discussion of the Sponsor’s Technical Capacity and Capability can be found in Sections 1.1a and 1.1b below. b. Real Estate Acquisition MTACC did not report any significant real estate changes in its February 2016 Monthly Report. Details are provided in Section 2.6 of this report. c. Engineering/Design Progress for remaining design work continues to lag design milestone targets. The GEC and PMT continue to consistently miss target dates for completing the remaining design activities on the project due to continuing scope transfers between contract packages. Design completion of the Contract CQ033, Mid-Day Storage Yard, package continues to be delayed due to uresolved coordination issues with LIRR, as well as late approval of track design variances required from LIRR. The need to accommodate Positive Train Control capability has also caused some delays. Details are provided in Section 2.1 of this report. d. Procurement For the CM007 package, during November 2015, five proposers of the seven were qualified for continued negotiation. Addendum #30 was issued to three of these remaining qualified proposers who submitted revised costs and schedules, representing the first round of Best and Final Offers, on December 30, 2015. The PMOC notes that ESA has requested the proposers to modify their schedules based on an increase of contract time from 40 to 42 months and to accommodate late site access caused by the Contract CM006 Milestone #2 delay. MTACC was able to complete the initial negotiations with the apparent low bidder and the contract was approved by the MTA Board on January 27, 2016. Award is pending completion of negotiations on the Best and Final Offer (BAFO) schedule and acceptance of the final contract price and schedule. Delay to ESA program critical path is now expected to be over three months. The PMOC believes that there maybe a risk that the final agreements reached through negotiations may not support the contract price and period of performance approved by the MTA Board in January 2016.


Contract VQ033, Mid-Day Storage Yard CILs, is a separate procurement package that will provide the eight Central Instrument Location huts (CILs) for Contract CQ033. VQ033 was advertised on August 17, 2015, and bids were received on October 30, 2015. The contract was awarded on January 15, 2016, with a Notice to Proceed date of January 19, 2016. e. Railroad Force Account (Support and Construction) During March 2016, LIRR Force Account Signal personnel continued to identify, organize, pull, and terminate signal cables at the “H6” CIL and its signal cases; installed conduit and signals at recently installed Signal Bridge #16; continued to make circuit revisions at the “H1” and “H3” CILs; placed the “H2” CIL in its location; continued breakdown testing at signal cases “H1A”, “H1B”, and “H1C”; and continued conduit installation at the #6167 crossover and the “H2” CIL. LIRR High Tension personnel continued to install conduits and pull high tension cables between signal power separation towers T36 and T40. LIRR Light and Power personnel continued to install and terminate cables between the signal power separation towers and the transformers at the “H1” and “H6” CILs. Amtrak C&S personnel installed signal cable at the “F2E” signal hut, conduit at the “F2J” signal hut, and continued to install signal trough along Loop 2 between Loop and future “T” Interlockings. Amtrak Electric Traction personnel continued to relocate catenary and signal feeder wires at the B-912, B-913, B-914, B-924MOD, and B-924WA catenary poles and continued to make catenary revisions for the future installation of catenary wires over the #747 crossover in “F” Interlocking. Amtrak Communications personnel installed communications cables between “R” and “T” Interlockings.

f. Third-Party Construction Manhattan: During 1Q2016, the CM005 contractor (Manhattan South Structures) continued to install pneumatically applied concrete (PAC) for the upper level walls GCT 1 & 2 East Wye. In the GCT 1 & 2 West Wye the contractor continued wall, stair and duct bench construction. Duct bench construction was completed in the connector tunnels. The contractor also completed PAC construction in the connector tunnels and TT1 at 38th St. The contractor completed south end wall construction in both East and West GCT Caverns. At the 37th St. upper vent facility air plenum concrete wall construction and site work continued. Punchlist activity and grouting also continued site wide. The contractor has planned to complete all work in early April 2016. The CM006 contractor (Manhattan North Structures) continued to install waterproofing at various locations: the 55th St. Vent Facility, 50th St. Air Plenum, GCT 3 East and West Wyes, Cross Passage 4, Access Tunnel #5, and Tunnels 302, 303, EB4, WB1, and WB3. The contractor continued PAC construction at various locations: 50th St. Air Plenum, GCT 3 West Wye, GCT 4 and GCT 5 East and West Wyes, Cross Flue, Cross Passages 7 and 8, and Tunnels WB1 and WB3. At WB1 the contractor installed permanent reinforcing ribs at two areas of incompetent rock. Concrete construction of slabs, walls, and arches continued at various locations: 53th St. Sump Chamber and Tunnels 302, 303, EB4 and WB1. Duct bench construction continued at GCT 4 East and West Wyes and at Tunnels EB2 and WB1. The contractor completed construction at the GCT Eastbound Cavern Back of House (BOH) and continued construction of the upper level walls at the Westbound Cavern BOH. The contractor continued work at the 63rd St. Tunnels and Structures including lead abatement, concrete repairs, and ductbank work. The contractor will continue construction operations with two shifts into June 2016 after reducing from three shifts earlier in the year. The construction schedule remains under review for milestone adjustments as needed to align with contract CM007.


Queens: During 1Q2016, the CQ032 contractor (Plaza Substation and Queens Structures) continued exterior masonry, overhead mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) installations, and interior finishes work at the Yard Services Building. At the Plaza Vent Structure, the contractor also continued interior finishes and exterior cladding & louver installation. The contractor continued Plaza site work. Removal of the BMT subway underpinning system at Northern Boulevard started in January 2016. The contractor also completed duct bench construction in the Bellmouth. Fire standpipe installation and testing continued in Tunnel A. Excavation work started on the west side of 23rd St. Facility for the two remaining ventilation shafts per re-design to address underground obstructions. Harold Interlocking: Contract CH053 (Harold Interlocking, Part 1 and G.O.2 Substation): The MTACC declared “Substantial Completion” for the CH053 contract on February 29, 2016. Nonetheless, the contractor continued to make modifications to miscellaneous catenary poles, prepare trackbed for the Westbound Bypass, construct access roads, install catch basins and communications duct banks, and make punchlist repairs throughout its job sites during March 2016. Contract CH057 Harold Structures Part 3: The CH057 contractor began construction of the Tunnel D Approach Structure in March 2016 with installation of secant and soldier piles for support of excavation (SOE) at the East Portal of the tunnel under 39th St. overhead bridge. The contractor also began installation of soldier piles for SOE at the 48th St. bridge in preparation to remove the old LIRR Main Line #2 (ML 2) bridge structure and abutments. Contract CH057A (Westbound Bypass): During March 2016, the CH057A contractor continued preparations to launch the “jacked box” shield to excavate the Westbound Bypass Tunnel under Lines 2 and 4 in Harold Interlocking. The contractor began excavation of the East Approach Structure toward the launch block between secant piles it installed previously. In its effort to de-water the West Approach Structure of the tunnel, the contractor has largely been able to abate the water profile problem that it previously encountered, although not totally. There is still an area of approximately 15’ in length near the west portal in which the underlying water table is too high. ESA has accepted the contractor’s solution to begin excavation at the west end of the structure and mitigate the problem when it approaches the west portal with a temporary sump pump. Additionally, the contractor continued to install guy anchors on the steel signal separation poles at Woodside and install Signal Bridge #16 during March 2016. Systems: Contract CS179 – Systems Facilities Package No. 1: During March 2016, the CS179 contractor continued various elements of work (conduit installations, concrete work, temporary power installations, etc.) at the 2nd Ave.; B10; Roosevelt; Vernon; Tunnel Tracks B/C and D; Yard Lead Tunnel; 29th St.; Queens Plaza; 39th St. and 63rd St. facilities. The two (2) Stop Work Orders (SWOs) for work in the control rooms at the Vernon and B10 facilities are still in effect. As previously reported, these SWOs were issued because of the design conflict between the room sizes and equipment layouts in the control rooms. The GEC is still working on solutions to this issue and no date was given for the rescinding of the SWOs. Work at the 23rd Street facility remains on hold as a result of an issue with water infiltration through the concrete floor. Discussions with the CQ032 contractor regarding this issue continue.


Contract CS084 Traction Power System Package 4: In March 2016, the MTACC reported that the contract modification for the L3 electrical service work was executed, allowing the contractor to progress the installation work. The only other construction work progressing on this contract is the surveying of the various work locations. The contractor is reporting that contract Milestone Nos. 1 and 2 are delayed due to its inability to get approval of the C05 and C08 substation designs.

g. Vehicles Details of the vehicle procurement (non-federally funded portion) are provided in Section 2.5 of this report. h. Commissioning and Start-Up The last Quarterly Operational Readiness briefing was held on December 17, 2015, and the 1Q2016 briefing was postponed, due to scheduling conflicts, until April 2016. As a result, there are no significant updates to those already reported in the PMOC’s December 2015 report. However, the PMOC continues to note that definitive dates for the completion of safety certifications need to be identified. PMOC concerns are provided in Section 2.4 in this report. i. Project Schedule Table 1 provides a summary of critical milestone dates including PMOC and Grantee forecasts:

Table 1: Summary of Critical Dates

FFGA

Forecast (F) Completion, Actual (A) Start

Grantee* PMOC

Begin Construction September 2001 September 2001 (A) September 2001 (A)

Construction Complete December 2013 December 2022 (F) September 2023 (F)**

Revenue Service December 2013 December 2022 (F) September 2023 (F) * Source – Grantee forecast Revenue Operations Date per information presented to the MTA CPOC in June 2014. **Source –Based on PMOC 2014 schedule trending analysis representing a medium degree of mitigation.


j. Project Cost Table 2 provides a summary of project cost estimates and expenditures vs. the FFGA forecasts:

Table 2: Project Budget/Cost Table (February 1, 2016)

FFGA MTA’s Current Baseline Budget

CBB

Expenditures

(Millions)

(% of Grand Total Cost)

Obligated (Millions)

(% of Grand Total Cost)

(Millions) (% of CBB)

Grand Total Cost $7,386 100.00% $4,724 $11,214.0 100.00% $6,668.9 59.47%

Financing Cost $1,036 14.00% $617 $1,036.0 9.24% $617.6 59.61%

Total Project Cost $6,350 86.00% $4,107 $10,178.0 90.76% $6,051.3 59.45%

Federal Share $2,683 36.30% $1,148 $2,699.0 24.07% $2,023.9 74.99%

5309 New Starts Share $2,632 35.60% $1,098 $2,436.6 21.73% $1,761.8 72.31%

Non New Starts Grants $51 0.70% $50 $67.0 0.60% $66.7 99.55%

ARRA 0 0.00% 0 $195.4 1.74% $195.4 100.00% Local Share $3,667 49.60% $2,959 $7,479.0 66.69% $4,027.4 53.85%

k. Project Risk The PMOC had previously expressed its concern that the risk management area has not been adequately supervised since the re-assignment of the long serving Risk Manager in late 2Q2015. The new Risk Manager, who started work on the project in January 2016, held a program-wide risk meeting with the PMOC on March 14, 2106, the first such meeting since January 2015. The PMOC believes that the risk management process on ESA will be restored to its proper functioning as a key input to the PMT’s decision making process. Details are provided in Section 6.0 of this report. MONTHLY UPDATE The information contained in the body of this report is in accordance with Oversight Procedure #25, to “inform the FTA of the most critical project occurrences, issues, and next steps, as well as professional opinions and recommendations.” Where a section is included with no text, there are no new “critical project occurrences [or] issues” to report this month.

ELPEP COMPLIANCE SUMMARY The current status of each of the remaining main ELPEP components is summarized as follows: Technical Capacity and Capability (TCC): The FTA requested MTACC to

update its TCC Plan in response to the FTA/PMOC comments that were generated in November 2013 as a result of significant changes in key ESA upper management level positions. MTACC submitted its revised Technical Capacity and Capability


Plan (ESA and SAS) on April 13, 2015. The PMOC returned comments to the FTA on May 7, 2015. MTACC submitted a revised TCC Plan in response to FTA/PMOC comments on June 12, 2015. In August 2015, the PMOC provided the FTA with its evaluation of the MTACC responses to the PMOC review comments and recommended a meeting with MTACC to resolve remaining issues. The FTA subsequently provided MTACC with the evaluation. MTACC responded with a reply on September 24, 2015.

Continuing ELPEP Compliance: The following ELPEP components continue to need improvement or are deficient: Design Development; Change Control Committee (CCC) Process and Results; Stakeholder Management; Issues Management; Procurement; and Risk-Informed Decision Making. The PMOC notes progress in two components – management decision making and timeliness of decision making. The PMOC had been particularly concerned about the effectiveness of the risk management process since June 2015 due to the staffing change at that time and the lack of continuity of leadership because the ESA Risk Manager position was vacant from October 2015 through early January 2016. The PMOC does note, however, that the new ESA Risk Manager has been actively working to status and update the risk management process since January 2016 and held a long overdue program level risk meeting with the PMOC on March 14, 2016. The PMOC anticipates seeing continuing improvements in the risk management process.

Project Management Plan: MTACC submitted PMP Rev. 10 to the FTA and PMOC on July 18, 2014. This revision incorporates changes stemming from FTA/PMOC comments on PMP Rev. 9.0, provided in December 2013, as well as changes that resulted from the MTACC’s Candidate Revision process. Based on working meetings, dialogue, and additional clarifying review comments from the PMOC, the MTACC made additional changes to the PMP and submitted an updated Rev. 10 on September 18, 2014. The PMOC completed its review and evaluation of MTACC’s revisions and responses and submitted its findings to FTA-RII in 4Q2014. MTACC subsequently submitted a revised Rev. 10 on March 13, 2015, that included updated information on the Change Control Committee. Several working meetings involving ESA chapter authors and the corresponding PMOC reviewers have been held since June 2015 to resolve the remaining outstanding FTA/PMOC evaluation comments. These meetings continued through December 2015. MTACC and the PMOC are working to schedule the few remaining meetings required to complete this process.

The PMOC notes that, since June 2013, the ESA project has continued to be non-compliant with ELPEP, and is not meeting some of the more important requirements of the Schedule Management Plan (SMP) and Cost Management Plan (CMP) sub-plans of the PMP. The PMOC believes that this continues to be a serious deficiency and needs to be resolved as soon as possible. [Ref: ESA-114-Sep13] The PMOC does note, however, progress in certain areas. The PMOC’s major areas of concern include: Cost/Schedule Contingency: In November 2014, ESA submitted its initial cost and

schedule contingency utilization curves for the new baseline budget and schedule presented to CPOC in June 2014 in order to comply with ELPEP. A series of


meetings has been held to discuss the MTACC drawdown curves and the FTA/PMOC proposed cost and schedule contingency minimums. On September 17, 2015, the PMOC presented the recommended cost contingency minimums with justification. A series of meetings was held to discuss the MTACC drawdown curves and the FTA/PMOC proposed cost and schedule contingency minimums, the latest occurring on January 15, 2016. At that time, MTACC accepted the FTA/PMOC recommended minimum ELPEP cost and schedule contingency hold points, dollar and calendar day values, and curves for the remainder of the program. Therefore, the PMOC considers this deficiency to now be resolved.

Schedule Management Plan (SMP): The ESA project remains non-compliant with requirements for Integrated Project Schedule (IPS) Updating, Forecasting, and Schedule Contingency Management against a current baseline schedule. Given that the new budget and schedule have been put in place, the PMOC expected that MTACC would start to meet the requirements set forth in its SMP in the above-referenced areas. The revised SMP was submitted on 4Q2015, and the PMOC is working to complete its review.

Cost Management Plan (CMP): The ESA project remains non-compliant with requirements for Project Level EAC Forecasting, Project Level EAC Forecast Validation, and MTACC Cost Contingency Management and Secondary Mitigation. Given that the new budget and schedule were presented to the MTA CPOC in June 2014, these requirements should have been met by now, but MTACC has made very little progress in this area. MTACC submitted its revised Cost Management Plan (ESA and SAS) on April 13, 2015. The PMOC returned comments to the FTA on May 8, 2015. MTACC submitted a revised CMP in response to FTA/PMOC comments on June 30, 2015. In August 2015, the PMOC provided the FTA with its evaluation of the MTACC responses to the PMOC review comments and met with MTACC on November 16, 2015. MTACC is working on additional agreed upon revisions and is evaluating the PMOC’s recommendations in six areas. MTACC provided an initial draft of the revised CMP on December 15, 2015, and the PMOC is nearing completion of its review.

Revisions to the ELPEP Document: As part of the process of updating the ELPEP document, the PMOC has performed an independent evaluation of the minimum required cost and schedule contingencies going forward. The PMOC’s basic recommendations were presented at several meetings with MTACC, the last on September 17, 2015. On October 14, 2015, the PMOC provided the FTA and MTACC with an expanded basis for the PMOC’s recommended minimum schedule contingencies to Revenue Service Date (RSD). MTACC responded on October 27, 2015, with no exceptions taken to the PMOC proposed minimum schedule contingency values. MTACC did, however, have comments on certain bases of the PMOC’s position. On December 7, 2015, the PMOC provided MTACC with additional details of the PMOC’s evaluation of the MTACC proposed values for the ELPEP minimum cost contingency hold points along with an expanded basis for the PMOC’s position regarding those values. At a meeting on January 15, 2016, MTACC and the ESA PMT accepted the FTA/PMOC proposed ELPEP minimum cost contingency hold point values. Therefore, the issues regarding the ELPEP minimum cost and schedule contingencies have been resolved.


The ELPEP 1Q2016 Quarterly Review Meeting was held on March 3, 2016. Summarizing the significant discussion: PMOC will work with MTA-ESA to resolve the issues with all of the remaining

comments on the ESA Project Management Plan. Final FTA approval is needed for the MTACC Technical Capacity and Capability (TCC)

Plan. The PMOC will work with the FTA to complete this action. MTACC provided an initial draft of the revised CMP on December 15, 2015, and the

PMOC is targeting completion of its review by the end of March 2016. The PMOC is targeting the end of March 2016 to complete its review of the 4Q2015

update of the MTACC ESA/SAS Schedule Management Plan. The PMOC noted that completion of its CMP and SMP reviews has been delayed

because of the transition, earlier this year, to newly assigned staff in the cost and schedule areas.

MTA noted that no new ESA candidate revisions have been recommended in the 4Q2015/1Q2016 time period.

The MTA-ESA Project Controls Manager noted challenges maintaining the Integrated Project Schedule. All identified problem areas are in the process of being resolved.

The results of the ongoing Harold schedule study are expected to be completed very soon. Once the MTACC president has reviewed and approved the proposed revisions, ESA will present the revised scheduled to the entire project staff, FTA and the PMOC. This had been anticipated to occur during the week of March 14, 2106.

The ESA Program Risk Register is being updated by the new ESA Risk Manager. MTA-ESA will include the agreed-upon minimum ELPEP schedule contingency hold

points and values in the 1Q2016 report to the FTA. ESA will add the actual schedule contingency curve on the chart.

MTACC requested a draft version of the revised ELPEP document. The PMOC will work with the FTA to expedite completion of the draft update.

The next ELPEP Quarterly Review Meeting with MTACC, FTA-RII, SAS and ESA projects and the PMOC will be held on June 16, 2016.

1.0 GRANTEE’S CAPABILITIES AND APPROACH 1.1 Technical Capacity and Capability a) Organization The previous Risk Manager who started in July 2015 resigned in October 2015. The PMOC had previously expressed concern that the risk management area has not been adequately supervised since the re-assignment of the long serving Risk Manager in late 2Q2015. ESA identified the new Risk Manager in December 2015 and he started work on the project in January 2016. The program-wide risk meeting with the PMOC was held on March 14, 2106, the first such meeting since January 2015. Based on the ESA Risk Manager’s good performance through 1Q2016, the PMOC believes that the risk management process on ESA will be restored to its proper functioning as a key input to the PMT’s decision making process.


During 1Q2016, the Executive Construction Manager left the PMT after serving almost 9 years on the ESA project. The project organization was revised and this position is no longer included. Construction work is now managed by individual managers for Manhattan, Queens, Harold Interlocking and Systems. The PMOC will monitor this organizational restructuring and note any change in the Sponsor’s ability to maintain the required level of Management Capacity and Capability. b) Staffing Please refer to Section 1.1a, Techinical Capacity and Capability, Organization, above, for discussion about the replacement for the ESA Risk Manager.

1.2 Project Management Plan a) History of Performance MTACC re-baselined the ESA Project in May 2012. This re-baseline resulted in a risk adjusted budget of $8.24B (not including rolling stock reserve and finance cost) and a projected RSD in August 2019. During 2013 and 2014, ESA undertook an extensive re-planning effort to revise the Program budget and schedule as a result of the CM012R bid overrun and continuing delays in several other major procurements (e.g., CS179; CM014B). This is the third re-planning effort undertaken by ESA since the FFGA in 2006 (the first re-planning effort took place in 2009). The current re-planned budget ($10.177B) and schedule (RSD in December 2022) were presented to the MTA CPOC in June 2014 and approved. The PMOC notes that ESA has been dealing with schedule performance set-backs primarily in the following areas: funding issues delaying award of contracts and systems contract options; poor performance by the CM006 contractor; and continued delays in the Harold Interlocking work caused by continued lack of adequate railroad force account support. b) PMP MTACC submitted PMP Rev. 10 to the FTA and PMOC on July 18, 2014. This revision incorporates changes stemming from FTA/PMOC comments on PMP Rev. 9.0 provided in December 2013 as well as changes that resulted from MTACC’s Candidate Revision process. Based on working meetings, dialogue, and additional clarifying review comments from the PMOC, MTACC made additional changes to the PMP and submitted an updated Rev. 10 on September 18, 2014. The PMOC reviewed Rev. 10 and provided its comments to the FTA in 4Q2014. A subsequent update to the Rev. 10 document was submitted on March 13, 2105, reflecting only revisions to the ESA Change Control Committee. The PMOC continues to coordinate with MTACC arranging working meetings with ESA chapter authors and the corresponding PMOC reviewers to resolve the remaining outstanding FTA/PMOC evaluation comments. Several working meetings have been held since June 2015 and continued through December 2015. Additionally, there is a renewed focus on resolution of the remaining comments for the Cost Management Plan and Schedule Management Plan.

1.3 Project Controls a) Schedule MTACC presented its new baseline schedule to the MTA CPOC in June 2014 with an RSD of December 2022. This date includes 22 months of Program level contingency. The PMT developed a draft schedule contingency drawdown plan as required by the ELPEP agreement and submitted it in December 2014. The ESA schedule contingency drawdown plan and the


FTA/PMOC minimum required schedule contingency levels were discussed at several meetings since March 2015, with the latest being on September 17, 2015, and follow-up activities continued through 4Q2015. In October 2015, MTACC agreed to the minimum schedule contingency hold point values proposed by FTA/PMOC. b) Cost MTACC presented its Re-Plan baseline budget of $10.177 billion (excluding Rolling Stock Reserve) to the MTA CPOC in June 2014. The PMT developed a draft cost contingency drawdown plan as required by the ELPEP agreement and submitted it in December 2014. The ESA cost contingency drawdown plan and the FTA/PMOC minimum required cost contingency levels were discussed at several meetings since March 2015 with the latest being on September 17, 2015, and follow-up activities continued through 4Q2015. On December 7, 2015, the PMOC provided MTACC with the PMOC’s evaluation of the MTACC proposed values for the ELPEP minimum cost contingency hold points along with the basis for the PMOC’s position regarding those values. On January 15, 2016, MTACC agreed to the minimum cost contingency hold point values proposed by FTA/PMOC. The ELPEP FTA Hold Point 1A, defined as 60% Construction and 90% bid shows a minimum contingency of $440 million. Currently, the project is at 60.9% Construction and 83% bid (without considering CM007 status) with a contingency of $648 million.

1.4 Federal Requirements a) FFGA As a result of MTACC’s re-baselining of the ESA Project budget and schedule on three separate occasions (2009, 2012, and 2014) since the FFGA was signed in 2006, an FFGA amendment is currently in process and is expected to be completed during 2Q2016. As mentioned above, MTACC presented a new project budget of $10.177 billion (excluding the Rolling Stock Reserve and finance costs), and a new schedule with an RSD of December 2022 to the MTA CPOC in June 2014. The proposed FFGA has a budget of $10.922 billion ($10.459 billion before Rolling Stock Reserve and finance costs) and an RSD of December 2023 based on the PMOC analysis that includes considerations of historical ESA performance and future risks. b) Federal Regulations As an FTA full funding grant recipient, MTA is required to meet the requirments of the Buy America Act. The PMOC makes note of current and new issues regarding this requirement in this section and includes additional details in the corresponding contract status in Section 2.3 and Appendix G. Contract CS179, Systems Package 1: Multiple issues affecting proposed equipment. Track Turnouts: As the PMOC noted in its 3Q2015 (September 2015) Monthly Report, MTACC has approximately 17 turnouts on hand for which it received FRA and FTA “Buy America” waivers in 2015 to use. These turnouts will comprise MTACC’s track program for 2016 and 2017. However there are approximately 41 turnouts for the years after 2017 (for which MTACC has none on hand), which must be procured in compliance with “Buy America” requirements. Consequently, on behalf of LIRR and Amtrak, MTACC’s GEC completed suggested turnout design revisions for both railroads in mid-November 2015. After it reviewed these revisions, MTACC submitted them to Amtrak in December 2015 and to LIRR in January 2016. Amtrak


approved the design revisions in January 2016. As of March 31, 2016, ESA had not received LIRR’s approval, however. Based on progress to date, the PMOC estimates that an order for the remaining 41 turnouts will not be placed until 2Q2016. Since turnouts are long lead items that could take up to 18 months from order to delivery, the PMOC further estimates that “compliant” turnouts will not begin to arrive until 4Q2017, at the earliest. Based on the PMOC’s experience, there are additional factors which could influence when a fabricator can deliver turnouts such as what time of year an order is placed, how many other railroad orders a vender has in hand, etc. The PMOC believes that MTACC must monitor this situation closely in order to avoid delays beyond 4Q2017.

1.5 Safety and Security a) Safety Certification Process Documents supplied by ESA at the 4Q2015 Operational Readiness Briefing indicated that safety certification for four design Contracts (CM007, CM015, CS079, and CS284 (Former CS086)) and four active construction Contracts (CM004, CM013, CM013A, and CM014B) remained to be accomplished. In its February 2016 Monthly report, MTACC indicates that the safety certification process for Contract CM013A is complete and approved by the LIRR System Safety Committee. An update on the scheduling of these System Safety Certification activities will be presented at the 1Q2016 Operational Readiness Briefing that will be held in April 2016. The PMOC remains concerned that the Safety and Security Committee appears to not be meeting on a regular basis in accordance with the ESA Safety and Security Management Plan (SSMP). This lack of regular meetings could hamper the effectiveness of the Committee in coordinating activities related to the Safety Certification. b) Project Construction Safety Performance Through February 2016, project safety statistics for lost time accident and OSHA recordable injuries on active construction contracts are trending below the Nureau of labor Statistics (BLS) national average with a CY2016 project wide ratio of 0.66* vs. 1.80 (2015 BLS Average) lost time accidents (LTA) per 200,000 work hours (national average). The ESA recordable CY2016 injury rate through February 2016 was 2.63 vs 3.2 (2015 BLS Average). * The Grantee uses a 12 month rolling average for their OSHA statistics.

c) Security The ESA PMT did not report any significant security issues in its February 2016 Monthly Progress Report.

1.6 Project Quality ESA Quality Staff: The ESA Quality Manager has assessed his requirement needs against all existing and future contracts. He has determined that he needs one additional person. GEC Quality: The GEC Quality Manager has been approved by the ESA Quality Manager who will perform an audit of the GEC in May or June 2016. Conditional Assessment Inspections: Every six months, the ESA Quality Manager performs Conditional Assessment Inspections. Based on experience gained in performing conditional assessment inspections during the past year, the process used is being reviewed. It is expected that the procedure will be revised in May or June 2016.


CM013: A closeout audit on this contract was held on January 12, 2016, to determine whether any quality issues will prevent this contract from closing. There are three (3) open nonconformance reports (NCRs), including one for pipes fabricated in China, that were installed and are now inaccessible. Closure of this NCR awaits resolution between MTACC Legal and the FTA. In addition to the three NCRs that are open, there are thirty (30) open submittals that the Contractor must submit for closure, four (4) contract modifications that must be closed, and Record As-Built drawings that must be resolved with the General Engineering Consultant (GEC). Based on the closeout audit, As-Built drawings are being given a further review and any issues found will be identified and resolved before this contract can be closed. CM014B: Some issues have been identified with as-built drawings and the ESA Quality Manager will be meeting with the contractor to resolve them. CM005: The ESA Quality Manager will be performing a walkthrough with LIRR in April 2016.

1.7 Stakeholder Management a) Railroads The MTACC PMT continues to meet with internal stakeholders MTA, MTA-IEC, the LIRR, and external stakeholders the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the PMOC each month to gain FRA’s approval to extend ESA project High Speed Rail (HSR) Grant funding beyond September 30, 2017. The Grant requires that all HSR funds be expended by that date, but MTACC’s “ESA First” Harold Interlocking schedule re-baseline will push Amtrak ESA HSR Force Account projects well beyond that date. Additionally, the sequence in which Amtrak decides to do its own work to reconstruct its East River (ERT) Line 1 and Line 2 tunnels that were damaged by Superstorm Sandy could have a profound impact on the “ESA First” schedule. Amtrak has been advised of MTACC’s concern and indicated in November 2015 that Amtrak is leaning toward closing ERT Line 2 first in 2019. Although this represents a delay from the earlier 2018 forecast time frame, the selection of Line 2 to close first does support the current ESA Harold Schedule. Both parties must continue to work together to develop an ERT Line 1 and Line 2 outage schedule that will have the least negative impact on ESA. At present, Amtrak’s work is not planned to begin until 2019, so there should be sufficient time to develop such a schedule.

b) Others Although there are other stakeholder issues that ESA must address, at present there is no evidence that any might have a significant negative impact on the project schedule or cost.

1.8 Local Funding a) MTA/New York State (Capital Plan) The MTA funding request for the 2015-2019 Capital Program was submitted to the NYS Capital Program Review Board (CPRB). ESA will need to obtain funding from this program to award all the options in the CS179 contract and to award the CM007, CQ033, and CH058 contracts. The $10.178 billion (not including the $463 million Rolling Stock Reserve) budget, presented to the Capital Program Oversight Committee (CPOC) in June 2014, will make the need for additional funding even greater. Until new funding is provided, the project has a funding shortfall of approximately $2.6 billion, and is part of the un-funded MTA Budget. In late October 2015, the MTA presented a $29 billion program to its Board for the 2015 – 2019 funding cycle. Although an agreement has been reached with the Governor, the Capital Plan


funding had not been appropriated to the ESA project as of January 31, 2016. Two of the three CS179 options that were due to be exercised in early November 2015 were executed, and Option 2 was split, with the $7.2 million portion (Option 2A) exercised and a $70.2 million portions (Option 2B) deferred until April 2016. In early January 2016, ESA was given an interim funding allocation of approximately $941M in 2015 – 2019 funds, of which $748 million was for the award of CM007. Funding will also cover the award of VQ033, forecasted overruns on Active 3rd Party contracts (excluding CH057A), CS179 Options expiring by June 2016, OCIP, cash flow needs through June 2016 for Force Account, Management, and Utilities, and additional real estate and utility relocation issues. Contract deferrals were also required in order to balance to available funding (new awards including Mid-Day Storage, Tunnel A, 250 Hz Track, Cab Simulator, Harold Stage 4, portion of CS179 Option 2B, etc.). b) Other Sources The total FTA funding commitment, as of March 2016, remained at $2.699 billion, as indicated in Table 2 in the Executive Summary.

1.9 Project Risk Monitoring and Mitigation a) Risk Management Plan (RMP) The MTACC RMP, Rev. 2, dated July 2012, is a sub-plan within the ESA Project Management Plan (PMP). The RMP, Rev. 2, was updated and incorporated FTA/PMOC review comments to bring it into compliance with the ELPEP principles and requirements. The FTA formally notified MTACC of its conditional acceptance of the RMP by letter dated March 4, 2013. MTACC plans to update the RMP, if needed, after completion of its current updates of both the Cost Management Plan and the Schedule Management Plan. b) Monitoring The PMOC had previously reported that it was concerned about inadequate support of the program level risk management process due to the lack of continuity of supervision created by turnovers and vacancy of the ESA Risk Manager position in 2015. This concern has now been resolved based on the PMOC’s observation that the new ESA Risk Manager, who started on the project in January 2016, has demonstrated his ability to accomplish the restoration of the risk management process. The PMOC also notes that the program level risk meetings with the PMOC have resumed with the March 14, 2016 meeting, the first since January 2015. c) Mitigation Current risk mitigations are discussed in Section 6.3 below.

2.0 PROJECT SCOPE For the 48th St. Station Entrance, the MTA Board approved the design agreement with the building owner. The building owner will provide the designs for the relocation of the existing interior utilities and will complete some limited structural design. Contract package CM015 will be revised and finalized based on the agreements reached during negotiations between the building owners and MTACC. MTACC is continuing discussions with the building owner to focus on finalizing the required easements and construction agreements. The GEC 100% design submittal is currently forecast for May 19, 2016. On Contract Package CQ033 (Mid-Day Storage Yard), resolution is still required between MTACC and LIRR for final determination on the scope of the LIRR Force Account (FA) work regarding the Arch Street Yard Tie-in. Design work progresses on the provision for Amtrak


access by means of the SUB4 to Line 2 connection. The design package still requires design variance approvals regarding LIRR track standards and clearances in order to provide sufficient yard capacity to store the planned 24-12 car train-sets. MTACC is currently projecting a May 3, 2016, advertise date for this contract.

2.1 Engineering/Design and Construction Phase Services As of the end of January 2016, MTACC reported that the overall Engineering effort was 99.0% complete, based on Earned Value for Design Deliverables, compared with a planned status of 100%. Its Cost Report shows 92.0% of the overall EIS & Engineering category as invoiced and 92.0% of the budgeted section titled “Design” (including Design Settlement) as having been invoiced. Status: Final resolution has been reached on the west end of the Mid-Day Storage Yard (CQ033) regarding what work is to be performed by Amtrak (track and signals) to tie into the ERT (East River Tunnels) and what work will be performed by the CQ033 contractor. Regarding the Arch Street Yard tie-in, resolution is still required between MTACC and LIRR for final determination on the scope of LIRR Force Account (FA) work. A potential new issue may arise regarding the design variances required for the track clearances in the Mid-Day Storage Yard. The GEC has noted that there are a large number of variances being requested, but is confident that the necessary approvals will be obtained. There have been two design variance meetings held in January 2016, but a more recent design variance meeting was cancelled in March 2016 and needs to be rescheduled. LIRR action is required. The advertise date for CQ033 is currently forecast for May 3, 2016. Design work on the new, stand-alone CH061A package (completion of Queens Tunnel “A”) continued. The 100% review submission has been accepted and the drawings were sealed on February 22, 2016. Contract advertisement had originally been scheduled for December 14, 2015, and then revised to March 1, 2016 , but this is being delayed pending final MTA approval. The CCC approved the budget adjustments to provide funding and ESA is currently awaiting final MTA approval based on NYS-CPRB sign-off on the Intent to Advertise. Contract CH058 work scope is being divided and repackaged into two separate contracts: CH058A will contain the Tunnel B/C Approach Structure and CH058B will contain the East Bound Re-route. Current forecast dates for CH058A include: advertise April 12, 2017; bids due June 9, 2017; NTP August 1, 2017. Design work for this package is currently on hold pending completion of a GEC Proposed Change Order. Additionally, the final design for CH058B package is awaiting the completion of a rail traffic simulation study for Harold Interlocking, and the final decision on building the Temporary Eastbound LIRR Passenger (TELP) track. The study had been expected to be completed in January 2016 but has not yet been completed as of March 31, 2016. The CS179 contractor continues to work on the design development of the various contract required systems. As noted in previous reports, the reduction of the backlog of submittal and RFI reviews continues to be an area of focus for the CS179 project team. In March 2016, the ESA CS179 CM noted again that the GEC has the equivalent of 29 full-time personnel focusing on this area and that the CS179 PMT will continue to work with the GEC to reduce the backlog even further. During 1Q2016, the contractor submitted Secondary Design documents on several systems in preparation for Secondary Design Reviews (SDRs). Preliminary Design packages for


the CCTV and Security Management System are scheduled for submission and review in April 2016. Contract CS284 (GEC Contract CS086), Tunnel Signal Installation, is a stand-alone package. The MOU with LIRR for inclusion of Positive Train Control (PTC) in this contract is currently in development and progress is advancing. In its February 2016 Monthly report, MTACC reports that the proposed Change Order to the GEC for the addition of PTC was being issued and that the GEC is meeting with the LIRR to confirm the PTC-related scope. Contract advertisement is now anticipated during late 2Q to early 3Q2016. For Contract VS086, Systems Package 3 – Signal Equipment Procurement, the GEC design was completed but revisions continue to incorporate the requirements of Positive Train Control (PTC). Observation: The GEC and PMT continue to consistently miss many of the target dates for remaining design activities on the project. Some of the delays are caused by the requirement to add Positive Train Control to the associated systems design and equipment. The PMOC remains concerned about the turn-around time to review of the Contract CS179 Preliminary Design Packages but notes the continuing progress made in reducing the backlog of design reviews. Concerns and Recommendations: The PMT design management team needs to focus on achieving intermediate milestones in a timely fashion and work closely with the GEC to help make this happen. The continual shifting of scope among various packages has made finalizing design documents and drawings extremely difficult. The PMOC had previously recommended that the PMT develop a design milestone tracking process for the remaining design work on the project, similar to what was done for the Harold catenary design work in 2012, in order to more effectively manage the design effort.

2.2 Procurement As of end of January 2016, the Cost Report showed total procurement activity on the project as 72.1% complete, with $7.342 billion in contracts awarded out of the $10.177 billion current reported budget. Status: The CM007 package was advertised on December 23, 2014, and contract documents were made available for proposers on January 15, 2015. The pre-proposal conference and site tour were held in early March 2015. The proposal due date was extended four times from May 2, 2015, to September 15, 2015, when seven technical/schedule proposals were submitted. The cost proposal due date was pushed back several times from October 6, 2015, to October 27, 2015, when seven cost proposals were submitted. The PMT technical ranking recommendation letter was finalized, approved, and issued on October 30, 2015. During November 2015, five proposers of the seven were qualified for continued negotiation. Addendum #30 was issued to three remaining proposers and revised costs and schedules, representing the first round of Best and Final Offers, were submitted on December 30, 2015. The PMOC notes that ESA has requested the proposers to modify their schedules based on an increase of contract time from 40 to 42 months and schedule changes to accommodate delayed site access caused by the Contract CM006 Milestone #2 delay. Final presentations by the proposers for the CM007 contract were completed in January 2016. MTACC was able to complete the initial negotiations with the


apparent low bidder and the contract was approved by the MTA Board on January 27, 2016. Award is pending completion of negotiations on the Best and Final Offer (BAFO) schedule and acceptance of the final contract price and schedule. As of March 31, 2016, this contract has not been awarded and the delay to ESA program critical path is now expected to be over three months. Contract VQ033, Mid-Day Storage Yard CILs, is a separate procurement package that will provide the eight Central Instrument Location huts (CILs) for Contract CQ033. VQ033 was advertised on August 17, 2015, and bids were received on October 30, 2015. The contract was awarded on January 15, 2016, with a Notice to Proceed date of January 19, 2016. Concerns and Recommendations: The lack of stability in the contracting strategy and Contract Packaging Plan (CPP) remains a concern. The scope shifts among different packages during 2015 have made it difficult to fully understand the impact of these changes to the overall ESA Project. The current CPP update (revision 10.2) was submitted on November 13, 2015. The PMOC continues to recommend that the ESA PMT should make an effort to adhere to the current version of the CPP and minimize shifting scope for the remainder of the project. The PMOC had previously expressed its concern that the Contract CM007 proposal due date has been delayed a total of 4.5 months and that this significantly reduced the time for negotiations on this very large contract that is currently on the program schedule critical path. MTACC was not able to award this contract as planned before December 31, 2015, and the program critical path is now being delayed. As of March 31, 2016, this contract has not been awarded. [Ref: ESA-121-Sep 15]

2.3 Construction The PMT reported in its January 2016 Monthly Progress Report that the total construction progress reached 60.9% complete vs. 62.9% planned.


Manhattan Contracts CM005 – Manhattan South Structures Status: As of January 31, 2016, the MTACC Forecast at Completion for CM005 increased slightly to $242,693,233. The MTACC forecast for Substantial Completion (SC) slipped by almost two months from February 8, 2016 to March 31, 2016. ESA reports that the slip beyond the contract SC date is due to remaining work volume and contractor’s production rate. Actual construction progress for January 2016 was 1.4% versus 1.6% planned. Cumulative progress through January 31, 2016, was 96.3% actual versus 97.0% planned.

From January 2016 ESA Monthly Report

Construction Progress: During March 2016, the contractor completed arch pneumatically applied concrete (PAC) for the upper level walls GCT 1&2 East Wye. The contractor continued wall, beam, stair and duct bench concrete construction GCT 1&2 West Wye. At the south end of the Westbound Cavern, the contractor has completed lining all four connection tunnels to the GCT 1&2 West Wye. The contractor also continued to apply PAC on the archway of Access Tunnel #1. Masonry wall construction continued at the upper level TT1 at 38th St. At the 37th St. Plenum, the contractor continued interior walls and slab concrete construction. The contractor continued contact grouting, FUKO grouting, and remedial grouting site wide. The contractor continued punchlist activity site wide. The contractor planned to complete all work including punch list activity by the end of March 2016, except for the last GCT 1 & 2 West Wye south stairs concrete pour and the upper 37th St. Plenum interior concrete slab pour, both to be done in April 2016.

1 2 3 4 5 6

Original Baseline

Current ApprovedBaseline

Change to Original

(2-1)

EAC/ Forecast

Change to Original

(4-1)

Change to Current

(4-2)

Contract Cost $200.6M (Award) $237.2M +36.6M +18.2% $242.7M

+42.1M +21.0%

+5.5M +2.7%

Scheduled SC Date 02/06/16 02/06/16 03/31/16

Duration (NTP-SC) 29 mos. 29 mos.

0 mo. 0.0% 31 mos.

2 mos. 6.9%

2 mos. 6.9%

Percent Complete Actual – 12 mos. Actual - 6 mos. Avg. Reqd. Progress

Plan Actual Total Avg./mo. Total Avg./mo. Contract SC Forecast

SC

97.0% 96.3% 31.4% 2.6% 10.0% 1.7% 3.7%/mo. 1.8%/mo.


Observations/Analysis: As of March 31, 2016, the contractor continued construction in the Upper level of TT1 (38th St. Vent) and the GCT 1&2 West Wye crash wall. The PMOC also notes that ESA and the contractor continue to work well together. Concerns and Recommendations: The PMOC has no concerns for Contract CM005.

CM006 – Manhattan North Structures Status: As of January 31, 2016, MTACC increased its Forecast at Completion for CM006 to $360,582,618. The MTACC forecast for Substantial Completion slipped four months to June 1, 2017. Actual construction progress for January 2016 was 3.4% versus 4.5% planned. Cumulative progress through January 31, 2016, was 56.5% actual versus 80.5% planned. ESA reports that as part of CM007 contract negotiations, a CM006 contract modification will be formalized to delete Milestone #2 and extend Milestone #3 and Substantial Completion, to align the milestones with CM007 contract access requirements.


Construction Progress: Construction Progress: During March 2016, the CM006 contractor continued lead abatement, concrete repairs, cable vault, and duct bank work at the 63rd St. Tunnels and Structures. The contractor continued arch construction with pneumatically applied concrete (PAC) at Cross Passages 7 and 8, and continued PAC construction at the 50th St. Air Plenum and walls in Tunnels 302 and 303. The contractor continued duct bench construction at Tunnel WB1 between 55th St. and the GCT 5 West Wye Cavern. The contractor continued the lining of Tunnel WB1, installing permanent reinforcing ribs at two areas of incompetent rock. Contact grouting continued at Tunnel EB2. In the tunnels between 50th St. Vent Facility and the north end of the Eastbound Cavern, the contractor continued to place rebar for the ventilation connection slab. During March 2016, the contractor continued Westbound Cavern BOH upper

1 2 3 4 5 6

Original Baseline

Current Approved Baseline

Change to Original

(2-1)

EAC/ Forecast

Change to Original

(4-1)

Change to Current

(4-2)


+66.4M +22.6%

+36.0M +11.1%

Scheduled SC Date

11/30/16 11/30/16 6/01/17


0 mo. 0.0% 38 mos.

6 mos. 18.8%

6 mos. 18.8%



SC

80.5% 56.5% 41.7% 3.5%/mo. 23.0% 3.8% 4.4%/mo. 2.7%/mo.


level wall construction at the north end of cavern. The contractor will continue two shifts for the 63rd St. Tunnels and Structures work until complete in June 2016, and then the project will continue single shift. Observations/Analysis: As reported before, the contractor is not meeting the recovery schedule milestones. In March 2016, ESA reported that an “agreed to” schedule, which remains under review, had been achieved with the contractor to align with CM007 contract requirements. The CM006 contractor‘s rate of construction progress continued to lag the planned progress rate. The PMOC has observed, however, that ESA and the contractor continued to work well together. Concerns and Recommendations: ESA must complete review of an apparent ”agreed to” contractor CPM schedule submittal, which changed milestone and substantial completion dates.


CM014A – GCT Concourse & Facilities Fit-Out Status: MTACC reports that, through January 31, 2015, the project Forecast at completion $58,222,843, slightly reduced from the previous $58,414,993. MTACC reports in their January 2016 Monthly Report that the forecast date for Substantial Completion is February 1, 2016. However, in their Quarterly Monthly Report ending December 31, 2015, it is reported the forecast substantial completion date as February 29, 2016. Regardless, the Project Office has advised the PMOC that substantial completion will be based on completion of energization of all 6 feeds. The PMOC projects this to be complete in March 2016. MTACC reports there was zero actual construction progress for January 2016 with no progress planned. Cumulative progress through January 2016, remained 93.4% versus 100.0% planned. The MTACC reported planned versus actual percent complete has been inconsistent throughout 2015, with no explanations given in the respective MTACC reports.

From January 2016 MTA Monthly Report

Construction Progress: During March 2016 the temporary switchgear to provide power for construction was turned over to the CM014B contractor. It also allows the CM014B contractor to turn the current temporary power source back over to Metro North. Training of CM014B electricians (5-Star) for turnover of the temporary switchgear and substation was completed and ConEd has approved the personnel. MTACC has advised that substantial completion will be declared when all 6 permanent power feeds are energized. Through March 2016, 5 of the total 6 feeds have been energized. During this period progress in completing outstanding work items, outside of substation energization, continued to be slow. Electrical testing continued. All 6 feeders must be energized to complete the SCADA and FM-200 (Fire Suppression) system.

1 2 3 4 5 6

Original Baseline


Change to Original

(2-1)

EAC/ Forecast

Change to Original

(4-1)

Change to Current

(4-2)


+14.72M +33.83%

-0.64M -1.08%



+31 mos. +172.22% +51 mos.

+33 mos. +183.33%

+2 mos. +4.08%



SC

100% 93.4% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A


Observations/Analysis: The completion of energization of the substation and the outstanding work items continues to be delayed. Concerns and Recommendations: The PMOC is concerned that the continued presence of the CM014A contractor at the site gives CM014B an excuse for delay claims.

CM014B – GCT Concourse & Facilities Fit-Out Status: MTACC reports that, through January 31, 2016, the Forecast at completion forecast decreased slightly to $461,057,357 from the previous $461,967,500. The Substantial Completion date remains August 18, 2018. Actual construction progress for January 2016 was 1.5% versus 1.7% planned. Cumulative progress through January 2016 was 12.2% actual versus 8.9% planned.

From January 2016 MTA Monthly Report *CM014B NTP was issued in Feb 2015; therefore, it has not had 12 months of construction yet.

Preliminary Schedule – The extended preliminary schedule continues to extend through March 2016, and is used as the schedule for managing the work. Baseline Schedule – The final submission was received on February 16, 2016 and returned PAN (Proceed as Noted) on March 17, 2016. Reportedly, there are a significant number of comments. Milestone #1 (Complete Terminal Management Center, Communication Room C-2 & Communication Closet C-5) – In its January 2016 monthly report MTACC indicated that the milestone date of March 5, 2016, had slipped to May 16, 2016. At the March 17, 2016, Progress Meeting, the Project Office advised that the milestone has now slipped to June 1, 2016. Milestone #2 (June 4, 2016) – Room 222 Communications; Installation of ductwork, grilles, diffusers, and exhaust fan was completed. Began erection of CMU walls. Room 308 ICC;

1 2 3 4 5 6

Original Baseline


Change to Original

(2-1)

EAC/ Forecast

Change to Original

(4-1)

Change to Current

(4-2)

Contract Cost $404.62M (Award) $425.42M +20.80M $461.06M +56.44M +13.94%

+35.64M +8.37%


Duration (NTP-SC) 42 mos. 42 mos. 0 mo. 42 mos. 0 mo. 0 mo.

Percent Complete Actual – 12 mos.* Actual - 6 mos. Avg. Reqd. Progress


SC

8.9% 12.2% NA* NA* 10.4% 1.7% 2.80% 2.80%


Began installation of refrigeration, condensate lines, and 2 AC units. The CCM has advised that this milestone is also anticipated to be delayed. Construction Progress: Work Trains are loaded/unloaded at B/N Yard. Surveying continues throughout and will continue for the duration of the project.

Concourse (Madison Yard) – Through March 31, 2016, installation of underslab utilities was approximately 70% complete. The contractor continues with waterproofing, rebar, forming and placement of cast-in-place manholes and ejector pits. Continued placing PAC (Pneumatically Applied Concrete) headers at the top of the CMU, UA walls in Zone #2 along Track #115. Continued drywall installation in the TMC Room. Placement of CLSM (Controlled Low Strength Material) backfill continues from south to north. Final concrete slab invert placement and grounding grid installation continues at the north end of the concourse for the new BP-20 Substation.

Demolition (Hog Houses & MTA Building) - Demolition remains delayed by MTACC. Relocation of personnel will be to the new trailer park on E. 52nd St., which is not completed. This work is being performed by the CM005 contractor. The MTA CCU has advised that demolition permits must be issued for this work.

Wellways – Installation of work platforms is complete in Wellway #1 and continuing in Wellway #2. Conduit installation is underway and sprinkler piping will begin the week of March 20, 2016, in Wellway #1.

Biltmore Connection – This work is temporarily on hold while structural steel shop drawings for structural steel and Construction Work Plans (CWP) are approved.

Dining Concourse Connection – Waiting for shop drawing approval for structural steel to frame the new escalator opening and stairs to the Concourse.

Elevator T-01 - Abatement and demolition of the existing elevator continues at night at the Burma Road Level and in the shaft.

48th St. Entrance – Lead abatement is required to the existing steel. Continuing with mechanical excavation and hanging utilities below the street decking. Began excavating for the escalator pit footing plenum. Constructing SOE (Support of Excavation) Wall at the ConEd vault. The contractor reports that the rock excavation is advancing smoothly and there is a chance that they may not have to use blasting to complete the work.

44th St. Vent Building - Began installation of the remainder of the permanent steel stair. 50th St. Vent Building – Block wall work has begun at the 2nd Basement Level. Conduit installation continued at the Concourse and 1st Basement Level. Continued installation of sprinkler piping. A change order has been developed for CM014B to perform the Elevator #9 shaft alignment corrective work that was previously installed by the CM013 contract. Continued replacement of temporary wiring with permanent LSZH wiring/cables (Low smoke Zero Halogen). Observations/Analysis: The PMOC observes that the contractor is having issues with completing the finishes in the wellway arches. This is impacting the schedule for delivery of the escalator components, which may delay removal of the tracks for the work trains.


Concerns and Recommendations: MTACC needs to expedite approval of the contract Baseline Schedule. As of the date of this report, the delays to the milestones have not affected the projected date of substantial completion.

Queens Third-Party Contracts

CQ032 Contract – Plaza Substation and Queens Structures Status: As of January 31, 2016, the Forecast at Completion for CQ032 increased to $261,737,072. MTACC Forecast for Substantial Completion changed to July 6, 2016, from August 23, 2016. ESA reports that contract modification alternatives are being assessed to mitigate schedule impacts due to the vent shaft issue at the 23rd St. Facility. Actual construction progress for January 2016 was 1.0% versus 0.9% planned. Cumulative progress through January 31, 2016, was 95.0% actual versus 95.3% planned.


Construction Progress: During the month of March 2016, the CQ032 contractor continued exterior brickface, architectural finishes, overhead MEP, and roof work at the Yard Services Building (YSB). The contractor continued architectural finishes at the Plaza Vent Structure (PVS), and continued Plaza siteworks. Removal of the BMT underpinning system south side of Northern Blvd. was completed, and north side removal is pending DOT approval. The contractor continued installation and testing of fire standpipe in Tunnel A. The contractor continued excavation work for obstructions at the SW vent shaft of 23rd St. Facility and will commence excavation for the NW vent shaft. Observations/Analysis: ESA reports schedule impact to the Substantial Completion date caused by the 23rd St. Facility vent shaft issue. As of March 31, 2016, the contractor had still not been able to correct the water infiltration issue at 23rd St.

1 2 3 4 5 6

Original Baseline


Change to Original

(2-1)

EAC/ Forecast

Change to Original

(4-1)

Change to Current

(4-2)


+114.3M +77.5%

+25.5M +10.8%


Duration (NTP-SC) 36 mos. 59 mos. +23 mo. 59 mos.

+23 mos. +63.9%

0 mos. 0.0%



SC

95.3% 95.0% 15.8% 1.3%/mo 9.1% 1.5% 1.0%/mo. 1.0%/mo.


Concerns and Recommendations: The PMOC is concerned that the water infiltration issues at 23rd St.will have negative impact on the Substantial Completion date. Harold Interlocking Contracts CH053 Contract – Harold Structures Part 1 and G.0.2 Substation Status: MTACC’s Forecast at Completion for CH053 increased slightly during January 2016 to $290,360,701 as the contract neared Substantial Completion. The MTACC’s previous forecast of February 29, 2016, for Substantial Completion was realized as MTACC declared Substantial Completion on that date. Actual reported construction progress for January 2016 was 0.1% versus 0.0% planned (the project was supposed to be complete by now). Cumulative progress through January 31, 2016, was 96.0% actual versus 100.0% planned (MTACC offered no explanation of this discrepancy in its January 2016 Monthly Report, but the PMOC notes that MTACC reports construction progress on accumulated project cost rather than actual construction).


Construction Progress: MTACC declared “Substantial Completion” for CH053 on February 29, 2016. During March 2016, the contractor continued to make miscellaneous modifications to catenary structures in Harold Interlocking, prepare trackbed for the Westbound Bypass track between 48th and 43rd Sts., construct access roads, install catch basins and communications duct banks, and make punchlist repairs throughout its job sites. Observations and Analysis: There are still several hundred feet of Westbound Bypass trackbed to construct, as well as, numerous catenary modifications and other punchlist repairs to make before MTACC and the contractor can achieve Final Completion.

1 2 3 4 5 6

Original Baseline


Change to Original

(2-1)

EAC/ Forecast

Change to Original

(4-1)

Change to Current

(4-2)

Contract Cost $137.30M (Award) $296.7M +$159.4M +116.1% $290.4M

+$153.1M +111.5%

-$6.3M -2.1%

Scheduled SC Date 5/5/10 2/18/15 2/29/16A


57 mos. +203.6% 97 mos.

+67 mos. +239.3%

+12 mos. +14.1%



SC

100.0% 96.0% 1.3% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% NA Achieved SC 2/29/16


Concerns and Recommendations: The PMOC no longer has concerns about the CH053 contract, but it does recommend that MTACC and the contractor continue to aggressively pursue all remaining construction and repairs necessary to achieve “Final Completion”.

CH057 Contract – Harold Structures Part 3 Status: MTACC’s Forecast at Completion for CH057 remained at $87,870,844 during January 2016. The Substantial Completion date remained at June 19, 2017, for the base contract (this contract has several options which could extend the eventual Substantial Completion date). Actual construction progress for January 2016 was 0.0% versus 0.7% planned. Cumulative progress through January 31, 2016, was 2.0% actual versus 1.4% planned.


Construction Progress: The CH057 contractor began installation of secant and soldier piles in the East Approach Structure of Tunnel D for support of excavation (SOE) under 39th St. overhead bridge and be

ESA Monthly PMOC Report - March 2016 · 2020. 9. 30. · Report Period March 1 to March 31, 2016...

Documents

Transcript of ESA Monthly PMOC Report - March 2016 · 2020. 9. 30. · Report Period March 1 to March 31, 2016...